May be you're not familiar with history or you're just playing blind games. In Iran and Iraq thousands of Sunis were killed? You mean thousands of Shias have been murdered in cold blood. Who are targeted when it comes to bombings? The Shias. All the Muslim related terror organisations happen to be Sunis. Well vast majority of them. How long are you going to fool people and in this day and age. We don't spend time on websites banging and bashing the Sunis. Take a good look at yourselves and what you're involved in.
I talk with proofs. I don't waste the time of readers with empty talks. And yes terrorist organisation hailed by Shias like Hezbollah, Mahdi Army, etc are all Sunni, who kill Sunnis isn't it?
Shia scholar Muhammad Baqir al-Khwansari in the biography of highly revered Shia Scholar Nasir Al-Din Al-Tusi, said:
وإيقاع القتل العام من أتباع أولئك الطغام، إلى أن أسال من دمائهم الأقذار كأمثال الأنهار، فانهار بها في ماء دجلة، ومنها إلى نار جهنم
“He is the Examiner, the Philosopher, the Polymath, the Widely-versed, the Honorable … … And one of his famous known transmitted matters, is the story of [his] alliance in Iran with the respected Sultan Hulagu Khan son of Tolui son of Genghis Khan, one of the greatest Sultans of the Tatars and Mongols, and his arrival in the convoy of the supported Sultan with full preparation to Dar Al-Salam Baghdad, to guide the servants and spread harmony [in the land], and putting an end to the chain of transgression and mischief, and extinguishing the circle of injustice and confusion. By ending Rule of Bani Al-‘Abbas (i.e. the Abbasid caliphate), and inflicting the general massacre on the followers of those tyrants, up to the point where their filthy bloods flowed like rivers, collapsing into the Tigris river, and from it, it shall collapse into the fire of Hell, their Home of Misery, and the residence of the wretched and the evil”. (‘Rawdaat Al-Janaat’ 1/300-301.)
Pay careful attention to his choice of words when he said: “their filthy blood”. Is this how he views the blood of 1.5 million Muslims who were massacred in Baghdad?
In the record Ibn Kathir(rah) gave in Al-Bidaya wa Al-Nihaya he said:
“The arrival of Hulegu Khan at Baghdad with all his troops, numbering nearly 200,000 fighting men, occurred on 12 Muharram of this year [January 19, 1258] … he came to Baghdad with his numerous infidel, profligate, tyrannical, brutal armies of men, who believed neither in God nor in the Last Day, and invested Baghdad on the western and eastern sides. The armies of Baghdad were very few and utterly wretched, not reaching 10,000 horsemen. They and the rest of the army had all been deprived of their fiefs [iqta’] so that many of them were begging in the markets and by the gates of the mosques. Poets were reciting elegies on them and mourning for Islam and its people. All this was due to the opinions of the vizier Ibn Al-‘Alqami the Shi’ite, because in the previous year, when heavy fighting took place between the Sunnis and the Shi’ites, Karkh and the Shi’ite quarter were looted, and even the houses of the vizier’s kinsmen were looted. He was filled with spite because of this, and this was what spurred him to bring down on Islam and its people the
most appalling calamity that has been recorded from the building of Baghdad until this time. That is why he was the first to go out to the Tatars. He went with his family and his companions and his servants and his suite and met Sultan Hulegu Khan, may God curse him, and then returned and advised the caliph to go out to him and be received by him in audience and to make peace on the basis of half the land tax of Iraq for them and half for the caliph. The caliph had to go with 700 riders, including the qadis, the jurists, the Sufis, the chief amirs, and the notables. When they came near the camp of Sultan Hulegu Khan, all but 17 of them were removed from the sight of the caliph; they were taken off their horses and robbed and killed to the very last man. The caliph and the others were saved. The caliph was then brought before Hulegu, who asked him many things. It is said that the caliph’s speech was confused because of his terror at the disdain and arrogance which he experienced. Then he returned to Baghdad in the company of Khoja Nasireddin Al-Tusi, the Vizier Ibn Al-‘Alqami, and others, the caliph being under guard and sequestration, and they brought great quantities of gold and jewels and gold and silver objects and precious stones and other valuables from the seat of the caliphate. But this clique of Shi’ites and other hypocrites advised Hulegu not to make peace with the caliph. The vizier said, “If peace is made on equal shares, it will not last more than a year or two, and then things will be as they were before.” And they made the killing of the caliph seem good to him so that when the caliph returned to Sultan Hulegu he gave orders to kill him.
It is said that he who advised [Hulegu] to kill [the Caliph] are the Vizier Ibn Al-‘Alqami and Nasir Al-Din Al-Tusi. Nasir was with Hulegu where he accompanied him when he (Hulegu) invaded Qilaa’ Al-Lamout from the Ismailis … Hulegu elected Nasir [Al-Din] to be his advising minister, so when Hulegu arrived and had some fear of killing the Caliph, the minister made it seem easy for him, so they killed him …
They [the Tatars] came down upon the city and
killed all they could, men, women and children, the old, the middle-aged, and the young. Many of the people went into wells, latrines, and sewers and hid there for many days without emerging. Most of the people gathered in the caravanserais and locked themselves in. The Tatars opened the gates by either breaking or burning them. When they entered, the people in them fled upstairs and the Tatars killed them on the roofs until blood poured from the gutters into the street; “We belong to God and to God we return” [Qur’an, ii, 156]. The same happened in the mosques and cathedral mosques and convents.
No one escaped them except for the Jewish and Christian dhimmis, those who found shelter with them or in the house of the Vizier Ibn Al-‘Alqami the Shi’ite, and a group of merchants who had obtained safe-conduct from them, having paid great sums of money to preserve themselves and their property. And Baghdad, which had been the most civilised of all cities, became a ruin with only a few inhabitants, and they were in fear and hunger and wretchedness and insignificance”” [Source: Al-Bidaya wa Al-Nihaya, 13:234].
Roger Savory says in his book ‘Iran Under the Safavids’ p. 27 to 29:
Shias therefore regard the first three Caliphs (Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman) as usurpers, and the ritual of cursing of these persons has always been a proper duty of Shias, although the emphasis on it varied from time to time. In the early days of the Safavid state, when revolutionary fervous was still strong, great emphasis was palced on this ritual of cursing. Safavid supporters known as tabarraiyan walked through the streets and bazaars cursing not only the three “rightly guided” caliphs mentioned above, but also the enemies of Ali and the other Imams, and Sunnis in general.
Anyone who failed to respond without delay, “May it [the cursing] be more and not less”. was liable ot be put to death on the spot. Despite the two centuries of propaganda carried out by Safavids, the promulgation of Shiism as the state religion was fraught with danger, and some of Ismail’s advisers were worried about the reaction to his announcement. “Of the 200,000-300,000 people in Tibriz”, they said “two thirds are Sunnis … we fear that the people may say they do not want Shii sovereign, and if (Which God forbid!) the people rject Shi’ism, what can we do about it?” Ismail’s reply was uncompromising: he had been comissioned to perform this task, he said, and God and the immaculated Imams were his companions, he feared no one. “With God’s help,” he said, “if the people utter on word of protest, I will draw the sword and leave not one of them “
[Source: ‘Iran Under the Safavids’ p. 27 to 29]
And many more examples are present to expose the crocodile nature of Shias.
38 Replies
9536 Views
February 12, 2020, 03:38:22 PM